SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L
SRSA.L (iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and FLQA.L (Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - SRSA.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI South Africa 20/35 Index, while FLQA.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the Linked FTSE Asia ex Japan ex China Index - Net Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SRSA.L returned 11.11%/yr vs 13.79%/yr for FLQA.L. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SRSA.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLQA.L.
Performance
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SRSA.L is traded in GBp, while FLQA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FLQA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SRSA.L achieves a -6.88% return, which is significantly lower than FLQA.L's 35.98% return.
SRSA.L
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- -5.01%
- 6M
- -12.54%
- YTD
- -6.88%
- 1Y
- 23.19%
- 3Y*
- 19.01%
- 5Y*
- 11.11%
- 10Y*
- 6.00%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.32%
FLQA.L
- 1D
- 3.58%
- 1M
- -10.03%
- 6M
- 28.49%
- YTD
- 35.98%
- 1Y
- 54.37%
- 3Y*
- 24.38%
- 5Y*
- 13.79%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.81%
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SRSA.L iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | -6.88% | 65.31% | 9.25% | -5.19% | 7.61% | 5.31% | -5.99% | 5.20% | -2.12% |
FLQA.L Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 35.98% | 20.59% | 9.64% | 6.42% | -2.58% | 5.56% | 3.57% | 5.57% | -3.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between SRSA.L and FLQA.L is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018 | 0.54 |
The correlation between SRSA.L and FLQA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Industrials
Healthcare
Energy
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Basic Materials
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Consumer Cyclical
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Communication Services
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Consumer Defensive
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Real Estate
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Industrials
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Healthcare
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
Energy
SRSA.L
-
FLQA.L
Technology
SRSA.L
-
FLQA.L
Utilities
SRSA.L
-
FLQA.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L — Risk / Return Rank
SRSA.L
FLQA.L
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SRSA.L) and Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (FLQA.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| SRSA.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.39 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.00 | 3.50 | -2.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.13 | 12.08 | -9.95 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SRSA.L drawdown since its inception was -52.58%, which is greater than FLQA.L's maximum drawdown of -20.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SRSA.L and FLQA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SRSA.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.58% | -20.97% | -31.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.06% | -15.46% | -7.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.05% | -19.58% | -7.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.76% | -19.58% | -8.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.58% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.79% | -11.81% | -9.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.97% | -4.07% | -12.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.88% | 4.49% | +6.39% |
Volatility
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SRSA.L) is 6.07%, while Franklin FTSE Asia ex China ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (FLQA.L) has a volatility of 11.08%. This indicates that SRSA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLQA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SRSA.L | FLQA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.07% | 11.08% | -5.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.73% | 22.18% | +3.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.16% | 24.30% | +5.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.64% | 16.69% | +11.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.99% | 17.91% | +14.08% |
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SRSA.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FLQA.L's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
SRSA.L vs. FLQA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SRSA.L nor FLQA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SRSA.L and FLQA.L have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLQA.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLQA.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SRSA.L.
SRSA.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FLQA.L is Asia Pacific Equities. SRSA.L tracks MSCI South Africa 20/35 Index, while FLQA.L tracks Linked FTSE Asia ex Japan ex China Index - Net Return. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for SRSA.L and 0.14% for FLQA.L.
Find the right allocation for SRSA.L and FLQA.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer